8 tuner Tivo?

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by kturcotte, Jan 5, 2016.

  1. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
  2. Dan203

    Dan203 Super Moderator Staff Member TCF Club

    49,116
    5,167
    Apr 17, 2000
    Nevada
    I think it was Brighthouse, not RCN, that Charter was going to buy. And I think that might have been contingent on Comcast getting approved to buy TWC.
     
  3. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
    Yes, that is in the process and moving forward for a close this year - supposedly.
     
  4. aaronwt

    aaronwt UHD Addict

    22,720
    899
    Jan 31, 2002
    Northern...
    I found this out this past weekend at my parents. There was a split second delay between the X1 and a client box. So I was going to hit pause for a split second and then play, like you can with a TiVo. What a big mistake.
     
  5. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
    Sounds like the type of response you get with a Directv HR-34 Genie POS
     
  6. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,268
    757
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    That's just bizarre. They are direct competitors. One thing I can't figure out is how access to MDUs works for overbuilders. Here in CT, in the area with an overbuilder, it seems that the overbuilder has access to every MDU, although it used to be owned by the city, so maybe they passed a law giving open access? I was looking at an apartment complex in MA the other day, and they don't offer RCN, only Comcast and FIOS (and presumably Verizon copper but who cares). RCN, Comcast, FIOS, and Verizon (copper) all run right in front of the driveway to the place. What gives? Or was RCN just too lazy to wire that particular complex? The work Verizon did on it is pretty impressive, with tons of conduits, lots of underground fiber, etc.
     
  7. TonyD79

    TonyD79 Well-Known Member

    12,232
    1,745
    Jan 4, 2002
    Columbia, MD
    Big companies like Comcast have many parts to them. One part may be a competitor with a company while another may be a partner in another area.

    Simple example for Comcast. Their tv channels (sports net and more) are partners with all other cable providers.
     
  8. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
    Apartments are private property. MSOs can cut deal with the owners to be the exclusive wired provider (DBS can be installed in a renter private area). Likewise, a MDU could allow all MSOs, providing all MSOs pay them a fee. If FiOS and Comcast are in the property, even simple economics might cause RCN to think the upside is not worth the buildout, even if fee free from the property.
     
  9. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,268
    757
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    I don't think that's done willingly. It's either required by law, or it would be too risky for them to deny access.

    I thought that the MSOs had a legal right to serve anywhere they wanted or is that only FIOS because Verizon has a pre-existing monopoly on the copper telephone lines, so FIOS is just an "upgrade" to their existing equipment which they already have the right to operate? Obviously, a bulk carriage deal with one MSO in a condo or apartment building would stack the economics against another MSO bothering to wire, but wouldn't they still have a legal right to wire if they wanted to?

    The whole thing just seems shady, unless RCN just decided that they didn't want to be in that particular complex because it would be too expensive to wire. I thought extorting kickbacks out of MSOs to get access was illegal too? It sure seems like something that would be illegal, as it is in most industries.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2016
  10. TonyD79

    TonyD79 Well-Known Member

    12,232
    1,745
    Jan 4, 2002
    Columbia, MD
    Of course it is willingly. You'd be mighty foolish to have a channel that only your cable systems can receive.

    Mutlifaceted businesses do things that seem to be at cross purposes all the time. Defense contractors compete for contracts then sub out portions to each other. Or combine on a different contract.

    No large company is a single entity that does everything in total harmony.

    Amazon has fire tv yet sells rokus.
     
  11. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
    It's private property. An MSO does not have the right to wire the Private Property without the Owners Permission.

    The could in theory wire the Private Area of a renter or Condo Owner, but that would be worthless as the wires would need to connect to the feed through the Common Areas which they have no right to wire.

    That is why a DBS can put a Dish on their patio private area....but not on any common area.
     
  12. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,268
    757
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    Are you kidding me? Comcast would LOVE to have a monopoly on a channel so that people are forced to have their service, not something else. Look at that sports channel in Philly that DirecTV won't/can't carry because Comcast makes it available, but at a ridiculous rate.

    You are right about defense contractors. I work for one, and they do some weird stuff, often for political reasons. Spread the money around.

    Hmmmmm, that's not shady or anything. I thought there was something in NYC that gave Verizon the legal right to wire, but some idiot landlords who are apparently living in a parallel universe were either dragging their feet, or trying to extort Verizon for kickbacks? Or is that right only because Verizon already had a telephone network in those buildings?

    Where I was in CT, it sure seemed that the overbuilder had legal access wherever they wanted. It's possible the city itself passed an ordinance mandating access without extortion though, as the city owned the overbuilder until recently...
     
  13. SomeRandomIdiot

    SomeRandomIdiot New Member

    1,200
    1
    Jan 7, 2016
    Its not shady.

    I wouldn't want Companies to have unfettered access to go drilling through my private property without my permission.

    Often Property a Managers will sign an exclusive service agreements and get service at a discount for everyone in the building/complex as a result.
     
  14. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,268
    757
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    I did some Googling, the first things I found were that there are disputes over who owns the existing drops to the units if they were installed originally by an incumbent MSO. This is a financial barrier to an overbuilder, or something like DirecTV MFH-3 being installed, but not truly a legal barrier, as the new provider could follow what Verizon has done, and install new wiring to the unit itself, although at a high cost. The Verizon MDU installations don't look cheap, but they do get fiber all the way into the units in most cases.

    The next thing I found was exclusivity agreements, which have been illegal since 2007, whether or not they include kickbacks, and solve the drop ownership issue by saying that inside wiring is accessible to any provider. That's great for small MDUs, where it's as simple as switching a wire on the pole, but they weren't an issue in the first place. It also guarantees AT&T access for video services, as they don't have to modify the internal wiring to provide U-Verse, they can plop a VRAD on the pole right outside the complex, and re-use existing copper to bring video services in. It also helps Verizon on their rare MDU ONT installations, as they can re-use TWC's drops to get the RF into the apartment, alongside their own copper for VDSL, provided the building allows them into the basement to install the fiber cabling and ONTs without trying to extort them for "rent" for their ONTs.

    But then, is there still a defacto exclusivity in some medium and large MDUs because there is only one provider with the equipment installed, and no way to force access, say to RCN, to install their physical plant to the tap locations where Comcast already has the drops and taps connecting? This is similar to the issue Verizon has with FIOS, although in MA and RI, FIOS has such brand recognition that it puts heavy competitive pressure on MDU owners to get FIOS installed if other complexes have it.

    I untangled the NYC portion of it. Under New York State Law, it is illegal to deny access to a property to install cable television services, which means that RCN, Verizon, and TWC/Cablevision all have equal rights to get into a building, AND under the New York City franchise agreement, Verizon has to install to anyone who requests their service within New York City, effectively using their rights under New York State Law to gain access to the building. Of course, this hasn't actually worked everywhere, as Verizon's incompetence has resulted in lots of buildings still lacking FIOS, but in theory, the laws make sense.

    So I guess the conclusion is that a lot of states are behind where NYS is with building access, and a lot of the franchise agreements are behind where NYC is with requiring build-out, which in combination, require complete coverage within a franchise agreement, and don't allow landlords to extort MVPDs for a kickback to walk in the door, and don't allow MVPDs to extort landlords for bulk carriage agreements in order to wire their building, which Verizon allegedly tried in NYC.
     
  15. Bigg

    Bigg Cord Cutter

    7,268
    757
    Oct 30, 2003
    Hartford-...
    I was writing my latest post as you were posting. That is extremely shady not to have open access for all providers with an active franchise agreement in the area. NYC and NYS have it right, forcing access for cable TV services. I doubt their laws were intended for overbuilding, but rather to get cable TV wired in the first place in the '80s. But nonetheless, that model makes sense, so that some rogue landlord can't deny access to an MVPD or try and extort them for building access.

    A landlord should be legally required to allow access to all utilities who have franchise agreements in that area.

    The bulk carriage thing is trickier, since it does provide a benefit to the tenants in a way, but at the same time, it takes choice away, since RCN isn't going to wire a building when Comcast has a bulk carriage agreement, and AT&T isn't going to go and install a VRAD when they know that Brighthouse has a bulk carriage deal on a building. It gets even trickier when a building/community has their own community access channels as part of the bulk carriage deal.

    There is a clear case that all states should follow NYS's model and allow open access. Banning bulk carriage, however, is a lot trickier of an issue, since it does provide benefits to tenants, at the expense of provider choice. That being said, I would MUCH rather live in a place that's wired for all franchised providers, and has no business relationship between the landlord and any MVPD.
     

Share This Page